Hand-Wringers, Conversation and the Future of Fiction

In a recent post, I wondered whether contemporary digital culture, and the short attention spans that seem to go with it, are a threat to serious fiction.  That, in the view of novelist Jonathan Franzen, puts me in the category of “literary hand-wringers.”  Well, all right, maybe just “hand-wringers.”

I came across the category in Franzen’s extensive review of “Reclaiming Conversation,” a new book by MIT professor Sherry Turkle, who is described as having close ties with the world of technology and thus launches her latest critique of the tech world’s impact on society with more credibility than might otherwise be the case.

In her previous book, “Alone Together,” Turkle argued that new technologies were making traditional values obsolete. Social media had come to be preferred over direct human contact because it comes without the hazards and commitments of real-world interaction. Turkle, Franzen notes, found in numerous interviews that human beings were viewed as flawed, forgetful, needy and unpredictable – and thus best avoided in person, it would seem.

And, as we have known for some time, in today’s world, “it’s all about me” anyway– a bonanza for marketing goods and services as well as a good excuse to interact with others as superficially as possible.

Turkle's new book apparently goes even further with Franzen reporting that she now believes the public’s enthusiastic embrace of digital technology has led to an erosion of human capabilities like empathy and self-reflection. A recent study, the novelist says, supports that conclusion, showing a steep decline in empathy, as measured by standard psychological tests, among college students of the smartphone generation.

If true, does all of that have implications for what sort of novels “modern man” is likely to want to read? I believe it does – and would argue that thumbnail descriptions of books on best-seller lists are a good illustration where reading preferences are going. 

Leaving literature aside, Franzen says “the most moving and representative section (of Turkle’s new book) centers on the demise of family conversation, thanks in large part to absorption in smartphones by parents as well by their more tech-savvy children." In fact, Turkle argues, it’s a vicious circle where children take refuge in their phones when they can’t get their parents attention and then parents feel freer to spend more time on theirs.

Steve Jobs famously forbade tablets and smartphones at his dinner table and that apparently gets a mention in Turkle’s book. But Franzen dismisses the importance of that example, arguing the practice is limited to  “highly effective people” and out of reach for the lonely, poor, overworked masses.

Long before Job’s preferences, or dictates, became public, it was well-known that one of the most important things parents could do was to have electronics-free, sit-down family dinners with their children and spend the time in conversation. At that time, “electronics” referred to television, not tablets and phones. So in a sense, what else is new?

But with the economic erosion of the middle class; with both parents often now working, sometimes more than one job, and with other changes such as the rise of one-parent families, who has time for distraction-free, sit-down family dinners anymore? It’s a fair question. They fall  into  the category of “boutique luxuries,” Franzen would say.

And then I’ve heard people ask: “What would we talk about? I’ve tried to bring things up, but the children aren’t interested.”

“How was your day?”  It’s a good way to start, and depending on the answer, could lead to empathy and maybe as the ensuing conversation plays out, even self-reflection – and maybe even an interest in fiction that deals with such matters.